[2023-08-01]Reddit评论区：中国载人登月初步方案公布

Gari_305
China plans to send two rockets to the moon by 2030, one carrying the spacecraft that will land on the surface and the other transporting the astronauts.
Both the rockets will enter the moon's orbit and after a successful docking the astronauts will enter the lunar lander to descend onto the moon's surface, state media reported on Wednesday, citing a China Manned Space Agency engineer.
The twin-rocket plan would overcome China's longstanding technological hurdle of developing a heavy-duty rocket powerful enough to send both astronauts and a lander probe.

中国计划在2030年前向月球发射两枚火箭，一枚搭载将在月球表面着陆的航天器，另一枚搭载航天员。
中国官方媒体周三援引中国载人航天局一名工程师的话报道称，两枚火箭都将进入月球轨道，在成功对接后，航天员将进入月球着陆器，降落到月球表面。
双火箭计划将克服中国长期存在的技术障碍，即研制一种足以同时发射航天员和着陆器探测器的重型火箭。

oForce21o -> Gari_305
so again they copy nasa

所以他们又一次模仿了NASA

Ishana92 -> oForce21o
How are they copying nasa when nasa did it with a single rocket back in the 60/70s

NASA在60/70年代用一枚火箭就做到了，他们怎么模仿 NASA 的

oForce21o -> Ishana92
nasa is doing it again with SLS and starship, two rockets, one carrying passengers and the other carrying the lander, docking in space. how is this not a copy of the current plan?

NASA将使用SLS和星际飞船再做一次，两枚火箭，一枚运载乘客，另一枚运载着陆器，在太空中对接。这怎么会不是模仿该计划的呢？

buckerducktruck -> oForce21o
There's is only a few correct ways do do stuff in space. Should China find a harder way to do something for the sake of not being called out by some reddit user? Should airlines use different methods and get rid of standard procedures so they won't get called out for copying?
More rockets are good, who gives a fuck. Knowledge should be shared so we can all move forward.

在太空只有几种正确的做事方法。为了不被某些reddit用户指责，中国是否应该找到一种更难的方法来做一些事情？航空公司是否应该使用不同的方法，取消标准程序，这样他们就不会因抄袭而被指责了？
火箭越多越好，谁他妈的在乎呢。知识应该被分享，这样我们才能共同前进。

dydas -> buckerducktruck
By the same token, it's completely reasonable to believe that the Chinese Space Programme actually draws at least some of its principles from the experience acquired by NASA…

出于同样的原因，完全有理由相信，中国的太空计划实际上至少从NASA获得的经验中吸取了一些原理...

Nrksbullet -> dydas
Of course, every industry on Earth draws principles from previous iterations, that's basically the scientific method.
Unless you're the Titan submarine maker.

当然，地球上的每个行业都从以前的迭代中吸取原理，这基本上就是科学的方法。
除非你是泰坦潜艇的制作人。（译注：那艘载了5个富豪内爆的观光潜艇）

CPecho13 -> oForce21o
And the Central Americans were clearly copying the Egyptians when they decided to build big triangles.

当中美洲人决定建造玛雅金字塔时，他们显然是在模仿埃及人。

guff1988 -> oForce21o
If you want to accuse them of copying, accuse them of copying SpaceX because they are literally working on damn near a carbon copy of starship and the heavy booster.
Copying NASA wouldn't be that big of a deal, most of the things NASA does are pretty much public information and NASA doesn't work hard to cover up "trade secrets" like a corporation would(You can get full engineering blueprints of the RS25 on Google.)

如果你想指责他们模仿，那就指责他们模仿 SpaceX 吧，因为他们实际上正在研究星际飞船和重型助推器的复制品。
模仿 NASA 并不是什么大事，NASA 做的大部分事情都是公开的信息，而且 NASA 不像企业那样努力掩盖“商业机密”（你可以在谷歌上得到RS25的完整工程蓝图）

housebird350 -> Ishana92
We went to the moon, now they are going....so, copying nasa.

我们去了月球，现在他们要去... 所以，模仿NASA。

buckerducktruck -> oForce21o
"They also copy the concept of cars and traveling." Think things through before you post my dude

“他们还模仿了汽车和旅行的概念。”在你评论之前，先搞清楚一些事情吧

Lollmfaowhatever -> buckerducktruck
You're asking reddit to not instantly lose all braincells and go into brainwashed drone mode when the word China is mentioned.
China has literally become a trigger word for a large number of American users on this site. As someone that's been to North Korea, the average American on reddit is deadass way more brainwashed than those guys. lol

你是在要求Reddit用户在提到“中国”这个词时，不要立即丢掉所有的脑细胞，进入被洗脑的无人机模式。
“中国”这词已经成为这个网站上大量美国用户的敏感词。作为一个去过朝鲜的人来说，我觉得Reddit上的普通美国人比那些人更容易被洗脑。哈哈

-ADEPT- -> Lollmfaowhatever
That's due to billions of dollars being poured into anti China propaganda programs.

这是因为数十亿美元被投入到反华宣传项目中。

ethancochran -> -ADEPT-
I'm also fairly convinced there are an absurd amount of both pro and anti China bots on Reddit these days. (Which would probably be included in your billions of dollars figure) Maybe user sentiment really has changed that much, but it wasn't nearly this bad even just 5 years back.

我也相当确信，最近在 Reddit 上有大量支持和反对中国的机器人。（这可能包括在你提到的数十亿美元）也许用户的情绪真的发生了很大的变化，但即使在5年前也没有这么糟糕。

buckerducktruck -> Lollmfaowhatever
You are correct and I was foolish to even get in this argument but if it helps someone expand their thinking then maybe it is worth it

没错，我甚至蠢到参与这场争论，但是如果这有助于某人拓展他们的思维，那么也许这是值得的

Smartnership -> Lollmfaowhatever
I’ve not personally met anyone who visited firsthand, only read what others have written about their trips.
In your experience, is there any hope for N Korea?

我个人还没有见过有谁亲自去了朝鲜，只读过别人写的旅行见闻。
根据你的经验，朝鲜还有希望吗？

Lollmfaowhatever -> Smartnership
North Korea is just China in the 80s, they're still poor and idealistic based on what I saw.
Our route from dandong to pyongyang, it was just a pretty normal albeit poor country. I wasn't there nearly long enough to know if there's hope or not, I think the country is paralyzed by their hatred for America and tbh I don't blame them if you look into what we did to them during the Korean War. We genocided up to 30% of their population by bombing literally every structure that our bombers could see regardless of what it was. Dumped more bombs on NK than all of WWII.

朝鲜只是80年代的中国，根据我看到的，他们仍然贫穷和理想主义。
我们从丹东到平壤的路线，这是一个相当正常但贫穷的国家。我在那里的时间还不够长，不知道是否还有希望，我认为这个国家已经因为他们对美国的仇恨而无法动弹，说实话如果你看看朝鲜战争期间我们对他们做了什么，我不会责怪他们。我们对他们30%的人口进行了种族灭绝，轰炸了我们轰炸机能看到的每一栋建筑。在朝鲜投下的炸弹比整个二战还多。

Siddharta95 -> Lollmfaowhatever
Respect.
It's becoming more and more difficult to find people that can evaluate the point of view of two opposite sides.

尊重。
现在越来越难找到能够评价两个对立方观点的人了。

Reiker0 -> Lollmfaowhatever
Any country would be devastated and impoverished with the severe sanctions imposed by the US and the rest of the world.

在美国和世界其他国家实施严厉制裁的情况下，任何国家都会陷入崩溃和贫困。

Smartnership -> Lollmfaowhatever
I really appreciate your sharing of your own direct observations
It’s unfortunate that a war from nearly 75 years ago, essentially 4 generations later, is still such a focus.
Vietnam likewise could have done so, but it has moved past the war and is now a thriving economy doing business with not only the US, but the entire world.
One would hope the N Koreans would enjoy that same prosperity eventually.

我真的很感谢你分享你自己的直接观察。
遗憾的是，一场将近75年前的战争，实际上已经过去了4代人，仍然是人们关注的焦点。
越南也可以这样做，但它已经走出了战争阴影，现在是一个繁荣的经济体，不仅与美国有生意往来，而且与全世界都有生意往来。
人们希望朝鲜最终也能享受同样的繁荣。

Lollmfaowhatever -> Smartnership
I think Vietnam, like the U.S., heavily benefitted from one of the sides outright winning and united the whole country. Korea doesn't have that luxury, North Korea lacks arable land so they are actually not food self sufficient. After the soviets fell they lost their food security and have been heavily impacted ever since. A united Korea would be a powerhouse but at this point the two sides are so diverse from each other that that transition would be insanely tough. Best hope would be to see if the current guy's deng xiaoping style reforms pan out and NK starts to open up and make some money finally.

我觉得越南就像美国一样，从其中一方的彻底胜利中获益匪浅，并团结了整个国家。朝鲜没有这种优势，朝鲜缺乏可耕地，所以他们实际上不能粮食自给自足。苏联解体后，他们失去了粮食安全，从此受到严重影响。一个统一的朝鲜半岛将是一个强国，但在这一点上，双方的差异很大，以至于这种过渡会极其困难。最大的希望就是看看现任朝鲜领导人的邓小平式改革能否奏效，看看朝鲜能否开放并最终赚到钱。

ForTheFuture15 -> oForce21o
Completely different spacecraft, engines, rockets, spacesuits, lander designs...But it's China so it must be copied!
I hope my sarcasm registers....
The rocket being developed is a triple core design called the LM-10, each core is powered by 7 YF-100K staged combustion cycle engines. The upper stage is powered by the YF-100M, and third stage by the YF-75D. Prototypes are already built.
Unlike the SLS NASA is using, the LM-10 will be partially reusable, with the core returning to Earth to be caught by a tether system (removes the need for landing legs). It will also replace China's other rockets for LEO launches.
The spacecraft itself test-launched in 2020, it too will be partially reusable. It doesn't look anything like NASA Orion.
We received our first images of China's planned lunar lander recently, it's far more conventional than NASAs SpaceX HLS or Blue Origin's Lunar Lander.

完全不同的航天器，发动机，火箭，航天服，着陆器设计... 但这是中国，所以必须是模仿的！
希望能听懂我的讽刺...
正在开发的火箭是一种名为 LM-10的三核心设计，每个核心由7台YF-100K分级燃烧循环发动机提供动力。上级由 YF-100M 提供动力，第三级由 YF-75D 提供动力。原型机已经制造完成了。
与NASA正在使用的 SLS 不同，LM-10部分可重复使用，其核心返回地球后，将被系绳系统捕获(不再需要着陆腿)。它还将取代中国用于近地轨道发射的其他火箭。
航天器本身于2020年试射，它也将部分可重复使用。它看起来一点也不像NASA的猎户座。
我们最近收到了中国计划中的月球着陆器的第一张图片，它比NASA的 SpaceX HLS 或者蓝色起源的月球着陆器要传统得多。

EirHc -> oForce21o
I mean, that's what China is best at. Their innovation is weak as hell, but their ability to reverse engineer, copy, (maybe via espionage, but who's taking note) and paste is exceptional. And quite honestly, the space frontier needs more competition. Maybe if there was some new found industry in the asteroid belt, countries would start developing interplanetary military, people would have jobs on ships off of the planet, research and development into future technologies could take the next leap.
China needs USA, and USA needs China. I don't want conflict, but a bit of an arms race has always been good for our economy and technological innovation.

我的意思是，这是中国最擅长的。他们的创新能力非常弱，但是他们的逆向工程、复制和粘贴的能力却是出类拔萃的。说实话，太空前沿需要更多的竞争。也许如果在小行星带发现一些新的产业，各国就会开始发展星际军事，人们将在地球外的飞船上找到工作，研究和开发未来的技术可以实现下一个飞跃。
中国需要美国，美国需要中国。我不希望发生冲突，但一点点的军备竞赛，对我们的经济和技术创新总是有好处的。

weaverofjoy
Glad to see humanity returning to the Moon! Between things like this and NASA's Artemis, we seem to be in a new space race. Hopefully this time it's permanent.

很高兴看到人类重返月球！在这类事情和NASA的阿尔忒弥斯计划之间，我们似乎正在进行一场新的太空竞赛。希望这次是永久性的。

Mahbigjohnson -> weaverofjoy
I can't stand the term space race. It's not a competition, at least, it shouldn't be.

我受不了太空竞赛这个词，这不是竞争，至少不应该是。

SumFriesWithThatSalt -> Mahbigjohnson
Competition can be healthy. In my opinion when healthy its also a great motivator

竞争可以是健康的。在我看来，健康的竞争也是一种很大的动力

vertigo1083 -> SumFriesWithThatSalt
Agreed. Imagine how many innovations that we wouldn't have or would've taken ages longer if there wasn't competition to fuel them.

同意。想象一下，如果没有竞争的话，有多少创新是我们不可能拥有或者需要更长时间才能实现的。

watduhdamhell -> vertigo1083
Wars often accelerate innovation faster than anything else. It turns out when you perceive losing as bad, and you perceive the stakes to be high, you try not to lose pretty hard, and that usually results in innovation speeding the hell up in no time flat.
The space race is no different honestly.

战争往往比其他任何事情都能更快地加速创新。事实证明，当你认为失败是件坏事，并且你认为风险很高时，你会努力避免失败，这通常会导致创新在短时间内加速。
说实话，太空竞赛也不例外。

blackpanther6389 -> vertigo1083
movies get produced by a team of people, surgeries work because of people working together, rockets get built by a team of people. Teams compete in sports, but it's the people working together as a team that is celebrated in the end. What competition are you referring to? You mean like when x company says their innovating over y company? Or x country is greater than y country? But again, people have to work together to make that happen not the other way around.

电影是由团队共同制作的，外科手术是由团队共同完成的，火箭是由团队共同制造的。体育运动中的团队竞争，但是最终庆祝的是作为团队共同努力的人。你指的是什么竞争？你是指 X 公司说他们的创新超过了 Y 公司？或者 X 国家比 Y 国家伟大？但同样，人们必须齐心协力才能实现这一目标，而不是反过来。

iiJokerzace -> SumFriesWithThatSalt
Not completely healthy once weapons enter the chat.
You can still have healthy competition in a solidarity setting, but I know that's just a song called "Imagine".

一旦武器的话题进入聊天，就不完全健康了。
你仍然可以在团结的环境中进行健康的竞争，但我知道那只是一首叫做“想象（Imagine）”的歌。

Grabbsy2 -> Mahbigjohnson
Capitalism thrives on competition, though.
The west is capitalist, therefore competition is best.

然而，资本主义在竞争中蓬勃发展。
西方是资本主义国家，所以竞争是最好的。

monkywrnch -> Grabbsy2
Yep. I doubt we'd be going back if China hadn't been ramping up their space program.

是的，如果中国没有一直加强他们的太空计划，我都怀疑我们是不是还会返回月球。

tanrgith -> monkywrnch
SpaceX was always gonna build Starship no matter what China did though, and I think that on it's own would be enough of a catalyst to make the US return to the moon, albeit probably on a delayed timeline

不管中国做了什么，SpaceX 总是会建造星际飞船的，我认为仅凭这本身就足以促使美国重返月球，尽管时间可能会有所推迟。

Frequent_Yoghurt_425 -> Grabbsy2
We aren’t really in the spot for a competition like we were during the 60s. Late stage capitalism is really setting in now.

我们不像60年代那样适合参加竞争了。资本主义的后期阶段现在已经开始了。

Alex_2259 -> Mahbigjohnson
Competition will get the US government to spend money.

竞争将促使美国政府花钱。

ohiotechie -> Mahbigjohnson
It shouldn't be but of course it is. We shouldn't have wars, we shouldn't need militaries, we shouldn't let people starve when there's plenty of food, etc.
But all of that ignores human nature which frankly is not necessarily benign. The threat of China creating a permanent base to begin extracting the minerals and riches of the moon, which they likely have no intention of sharing, has started a fire under the US to ensure they get a slice of the pie before it all gets gobbled up.
It shouldn't have taken NASA and the US 50 years to get around to finally establishing a moon base but if this is the catalyst that does it I'll take it.

本不应该是竞争，但这确实是竞争。我们本不应该有战争，我们本不应该需要军队，我们本不应该在食物充足的时候让人们挨饿，等。
但所有这些都忽视了人性，坦率地说，人性并不一定是良性的。中国威胁称要建立一个永久基地，开始开采月球上的矿产和财富，而他们很可能无意分享这些资源。这在美国国内引起了轩然大波，以确保他们在蛋糕被吃掉之前分得一块。
NASA和美国不应该花费50年的时间才最终建立起月球基地，但如果这是实现这一目标的催化剂，我会接受的。

SuburbanStoner -> Mahbigjohnson
We wouldn’t have any of the technologies we have it it weren’t for competition

如果不是为了竞争，我们不会拥有现有的任何技术

Flavaflavius -> Mahbigjohnson
It is a competition, and we should win it.

这是一场竞争，我们应该赢。

Usedcumsocks
Oh oh China? The comment section gonna be interesting

噢噢，“中国”？ 评论区会很有趣的

speakhyroglyphically -> Usedcumsocks
Hopefully users will focus on the actual subject.

希望用户们能够关注实际的主题。

spreadlove5683 -> Usedcumsocks
What do I know about the implications of China's advancement, but it was nice to reading the headline and kind of cheer humanity on. Obviously this is a superficial take, but whatever.

我不知道中国的进步意味着什么，但是很高兴看到这个标题并为人类喝彩。显然这只是肤浅的理解，但无所谓了。

Shot_Ad_5167
Looks like China is taking 'two is better than one' to a whole new level! Go moon exploration!

看来中国正在把“两个比一个好”提升到一个全新的水平！ 去探索月球吧！

lmvaughan
Can’t wait for man to step on the moon, been waiting so long!

等不及人类踏上月球了，等了好久了！

LeonSilverhand -> lmvaughan
Van Allen enters the chat

范·艾伦加入聊天

Souperplex
Let's see if this will piss off the US to get us investing in space again.

让我们看看这是否会激怒美国，让我们再次投资太空。

Osiris_Dervan
I get using two rockets to get the different parts to space, but why send 2 orbiters to the moon to rendezvous there? It would be easier to rendezvous in earth orbit and then you'd only need one boost system rather than 2.

我知道用两个火箭把不同的部件送到太空的原因，但是为什么要发射两个轨道飞行器到月球上会合呢？在地球轨道上会合会更容易，然后你只需要一个助推系统，而不是两个。

NPDgames -> Osiris_Dervan
You need x amount of total fuel in space to move your lander and capsule to the moon from low earth orbit. One approach to doing this is to create an absolutely massive rocket and send everything at once, which is what the Saturn V did for the Apollo program.
China is having trouble developing a rocket on par with Saturn V so they'll send up 2 rockets each with half the required fuel. The docking can be done pretty much exactly as easily around the moon as on earth.
Now by going separately you are taking a separate propulsion system, but assuming they can't launch all the fuel required on one mission, they'd have to find some kind of way to refuel one spacecraft with the other which is possible but difficult.
They could also probably do 3 launches (propulsion/fuel, manned craft, lander) if they wanted to meet up in earth orbit but that's an extra rocket. There's ultimately a whole bunch of possible mission profiles, this is just what they've determined will be easiest, which is probably true since it's what NASA is doing as well, more or less.

将着陆器和太空舱从近地轨道运送到月球，你需要X量的燃料。要实现这一目标的一种方法是制造一枚绝对巨大的火箭，并一次性把所有东西发射上去，这就是阿波罗计划的土星五号所做的。
中国在研制与土星五号相当的火箭时遇到了麻烦，因此他们将发射两枚火箭，每枚火箭只要所需燃料的一半。在月球周围对接，基本和在地球一样容易。
现在通过分开进行，你可以使用一个独立的推进系统，但是假设他们不能一次任务中发射所需的所有燃料，他们必须找到某种方法，用一个航天器为另一个航天器加油，这是可能的，但是很困难。
如果他们想在地球轨道上会合，他们也可以进行3次发射(推进/燃料，载人飞船，着陆器)，但这需要额外的火箭。最终可能有很多任务方案，这只是他们确定的最容易的方案，这计划可能是真的，因为这也是 NASA 或多或少正在做的。

therealjerrystaute
My prediction: something major will go awry, to either cancel or abort the mission. Or else there will be a fatality.
I say this because China has shown a curious weakness about doing major high tech projects all on their own.

我的预测是：会出现重大问题，导致任务取消或中止。否则就会有伤亡。
我之所以这么说，是因为中国在独自完成重大高科技项目方面表现出了一种奇怪的弱点。

highgravityday2121 -> therealjerrystaute
They have successfully landed rovers on Mars. Which is a feat that only the U.S and EU has done. I would be more worried that there new rocket Long March 9 won't get finished time. I think it was 2033? Starship is 20 years ahead of everyone else at least.
EDIT: NOT EU just US/China

他们已经成功在火星上着陆了。这是只有美国和欧盟才做到的壮举。我更担心的是新的火箭长征九号无法按时完成。应该会是2033年吧？星舰至少领先其他国家20年。
编辑：没有欧盟，只有美国/中国

Gagarin1961 -> highgravityday2121
Actually landing on Mars is a feat only The US and China have achieved.
China recently landed a rover on Mars, not the EU. With ESA, their budget is way too small for interplanetary rovers. They don’t have the interest to commit to missions that large by themselves.

实际上，只有美国和中国实现了登陆火星的壮举。
中国最近在火星上着陆了一个探测器，而不是欧盟。ESA（欧洲航天局） 的预算对于星际探测器来说太少了。他们没有兴趣独自承担那么大的任务。

French_Toast_Bandit -> Gagarin1961
Don’t forget the former USSR

别忘了前苏联

codedigger -> French_Toast_Bandit
Who gave us video of venus

给了我们金星的视频

window_owl -> French_Toast_Bandit
Only once, though, and contact was lost seconds after landing.

然而只有一次，而且在着陆后几秒钟就失去了联系。

French_Toast_Bandit -> window_owl
Yeah somehow their Venus landers were more successful than their Martian ones

是的，不知怎么的，他们的金星着陆器比火星着陆器更成功

Painting_Agency -> French_Toast_Bandit
The later Venera probes were fucking badass. The reason was, they didn't give up despite the tremendous difficulty of sending a spacecraft there.

后来的维纳拉探测器真他妈牛逼。原因是，尽管将航天器送往那里的难度很大，但他们并没有放弃。

nagumi -> French_Toast_Bandit
They did a lot more iteration on Venus.

他们在金星上做了更多的迭代。

SirButcher -> French_Toast_Bandit
Landing on Mars is a tricky one: it has enough atmosphere so you can't ignore the re-entry heating, but it doesn't have enough to use it to properly slow down your landing craft. So you need heat shielding, ways to slow down before entering the atmosphere, a chute to further slow down and then something which you can use to actually touch down in one piece because your parachute won't be enough.
Venus is really, REALLY hot but it is something you can get ready and test for on Earth (step one: get a really big pressure cooker...), and landing is really easy: just have a parachute which can withstand cat. 5 hurricane-level winds. And the chute doesn't even need to be big as the atmosphere is ridiculously thick: a human could safely land with an umbrella in their hand.

登陆火星是一个棘手的问题：它大气层够厚，所以你不能忽视重返大气层时的热量，但是大气层厚度不足以让着陆器适当减速。所以你需要隔热罩、在进入大气层前减速的方法、进一步减速的降落伞、以及你能用来完整着陆的东西，因为你的降落伞不够用。
金星非常非常热，但是你可以在地球上做好准备和测试(第一步：准备一个非常大的高压锅...)，着陆真的很容易：只要有一个可以承受猫体重的降落伞。5级飓风级别的风力。降落伞甚至不需要很大，因为大气层厚得离谱：一个人类可以手持雨伞安全着陆。

VFP_ProvenRoute -> therealjerrystaute
Why? They build, launch and crew their own space stations. It's not that much bigger a step to go to landing on the moon.

为什么这么说？他们建造、发射和组建自己的空间站。登陆月球并不是很大的一步。

clooneh -> VFP_ProvenRoute
A reusable rocket that's attached to a habitation pod, life support, and deals with incredibly fine moon dust is a step up.

可重复使用的火箭连接到居住舱，生命维持系统，并处理极其微小的月球尘埃，这是一种进步。

VFP_ProvenRoute -> clooneh
Reusable isn't necessary, just more efficient. The rest they've either already proved or is hardly insurmountable.
If anything it should be easier, it's already been proven possible by the Apollo programme, and they don't have the worry of democratic elections changing their plans...

可重复使用不是必须的，只是更有效率。剩下的他们要么已经证明了，要么几乎无法克服。
如果要说有什么更容易的话，那就是阿波罗计划已经证明了这是可能的，而且他们不用担心民主选举会改变他们的计划...

raresaturn -> VFP_ProvenRoute
It’s a huge difference

这有很大的区别

VFP_ProvenRoute -> raresaturn
Not really. The US and Soviets didn't even have space stations and went from men on orbit to preparing for moon shots within years. It's still a massive technical challenge but there's no reason why it should be outside their capabilities.

并非如此。美国和苏联甚至没有空间站，却在几年内就从人类进入轨道到准备登月。这仍然是一个巨大的技术挑战，但没有理由超出他们的能力范围。

arkhamius -> therealjerrystaute
Hmm they are doing pretty well so far. Rovers Tiangong, and today I've read they are the first country to launch metane propeled rocked so...

嗯.. 到目前为止他们都做得挺好。探测器、天宫号，还有今天我读到他们是第一个发射甲烷火箭的国家，所以...

Beli_Mawrr -> [Deleted]
quibble: they're the first to put a methane powered rocket in orbit. SpaceX's Starship beat them to launch by a few months at least, and I'm sure there were suborbital methane rockets before then.

挑刺：他们是第一个把甲烷动力火箭送入轨道的国家。SpaceX的星舰至少比他们早几个月发射了，我相信在那之前就有亚轨道甲烷火箭了。

Reddit-runner -> [Deleted]
The only reason China used one is so it can push out propaganda how it "beat SpaceX to the first methane-fueled launch rocket to orbit". But the decision for Methane is a logical one.
Methane is about the only propellant that allows for rapid reuse. And you have to start somewhere with the basic tech...
And even if you don't go for reuse methane is becoming a financially viable option now.
Only one or two rockets out of the dozens currently in the planning and development phase all around the world do not use methane.

中国使用甲烷火箭的唯一原因就是为了宣传自己“击败 SpaceX ，成为第一个将甲烷火箭送入轨道”，但甲烷的决定是合乎逻辑的。
甲烷是唯一一种可以快速重复使用的推进剂。你必须从最基础的技术开始...
即使你不追求重复使用甲烷，现在也成为了一个经济上可行的选择。
在全世界目前正处于规划和开发阶段的几十枚火箭中，只有一两枚不是使用甲烷。

YareSekiro -> therealjerrystaute
China has a great record with their manned missions, so I am not particularly worried about executing the plan, but I do think their rocket is gonna get delayed.

中国在载人航天方面有很好的记录，所以我并没有特别担心这个计划的执行，但我确实认为他们的火箭会被推迟。

Enkaybee -> therealjerrystaute
There are many many sources to steal that technology though.

然而，有很多很多的渠道可以窃取这项技术。

MisterBadger -> Enkaybee
Is that a fact?
Which sources would these be?

真的吗？
这些渠道是什么？

Enkaybee -> MisterBadger
yes
it
is
a
fact

是的，
这
是
真
的

MisterBadger -> Enkaybee
My question is, who are the many, many sources that can get Chinese men on the moon.

我的问题是，可以让中国人登上月球的很多很多渠道，是什么。

therealjerrystaute -> Enkaybee
You do have a point about tech theft.
However, stealing the knowledge doesn't always mean you can fully and successfully implement all of it. They've often failed to get the most difficult parts to work in the tech info they stole.

你说的技术窃取是有道理的。
然而，窃取知识并不总是意味着你可以完全成功地执行所有这些知识。
他们往往无法在所窃取的技术资料中实现最困难的部分。

chamillus -> therealjerrystaute
They've often failed to get the most difficult parts to work in the tech info they stole
Any examples of this?

“他们往往无法在所窃取的技术资料中实现最困难的部分。”
有什么例子吗？

therealjerrystaute -> chamillus
High end computer chips.

高端电脑芯片。

chamillus -> therealjerrystaute
Do you have a source for them stealing high end EUV chip tech?

你有他们偷高端EUV芯片技术的消息来源吗？

TheCervixPounder_69 -> chamillus
Stealth jets

隐形战机

jkally -> [Deleted]
China's space industry has been extremely successful in a very very small amount of time. Even this US and EU has admitted so. Dismissing competition by constantly saying they'll fuck it up because they're commies and they'll cut corners, or they can only steal, they can't innovate, none of those are good options for the US or the EU. We need to realize that they are far more capable than we give them credit for.
You can look at boeing's SLS, Boeing's starliner, Blue Origin's big glen, or any of the startups that can't seem to get it right with allll the resources of the US and the EU and you can that you can't just copy your way into space. The difference in the metallic coating of a single washer can be the difference in a successful flight.

中国的航天工业在很短的时间内取得了巨大的成功。就连这点美国和欧盟也承认了。不断地说他们会搞砸竞争，因为他们是共产党，他们会偷工减料，或者他们只会窃取，他们不会创新，这些都不是美国或欧盟的好选择。我们需要认识到，他们的能力远远超过我们所认为的。
你可以看看波音的“太空发射系统”，波音的“星际飞机”，蓝色起源的“大格伦”，或者任何一家初创企业，它们似乎都不能用美国和欧盟的所有资源来做到这一点，你就会知道你不能只是复制你的方式进入太空。一个垫圈金属涂层的差异，可能就是成功飞行与否的关键。

Space_indian -> [Deleted]
I swear, whenever there's an article about China on here, this sub's IQ drops by about 50 points. Incredible and sad.

我发誓，只要这里有一篇关于中国的文章，这个板块的平均智商就会下降50分。难以置信又可悲。

Grabbsy2 -> [Deleted]
He's not wrong though. I came in to this thread KNOWING top-comment would be shitting on China.
Its just sad. We have to stop downplaying them. Either they are a threat or they are not. They can't be both a threat, AND wildly incompetent.

不过他说的没错。我来到这个帖子就知道，热门评论肯定是诋毁中国的。
真让人心痛。我们不能再轻视他们了。他们要么是威胁，要么不是。他们不可能既是威胁又是极其无能。

Flying_Barracuda -> Grabbsy2
Actually, is comment is only designed to elevate is own ego is a childish sort of way. It's not sad to have a discussion about this topic.

其实，他的评论只是为了以一种幼稚的方式抬高自我。讨论这个话题并不会心痛。

feeltheslipstream -> therealjerrystaute
The premise is shaky. China has a good track record in space.

这个前提站不住脚。中国在太空方面有着良好的记录。

Emble12
The difference between the American and Chinese space programs is that NASA gets delays every year and CNSA gets them every five.

美国和中国太空计划的不同之处在于，NASA每年都会推迟，而CNSA每五年推迟一次。

CyanicEmber
Okay cool but if you kill those astronauts you will have to answer for it. Don’t half-ass this.

好吧，很酷，但是如果你杀了那些航天员你就要为此负责，不要半途而废了。

ovirt001
Ah, good...they're finally catching up to the US from 54 years ago (well, kinda, they couldn't build a giant rocket to do it all at once).

啊，很好... 他们终于赶上了54年前的美国(呃，算是吧，他们不可能一下子造出巨大的火箭来完成一切)。

bartturner
It is mind blowing that it has taken over 50 years for someone besides the US to go to the moon.
Just think of the technology difference available today compared to 50+ years ago.

除了美国以外，其他国家要花50多年才能登上月球，这真是让人震惊。
试想一下，与50多年前相比，现在的技术已经有多大的差距了。

Bierculles
They should take the american flag off on the moon because the US is petty enough to do another moonmission just to plant a new one.

他们应该拿走美国在月球上的国旗，因为美国小气到进行一次登月任务只是为了再插一面新的。

H_O_M_E_R
Yawn. America did that over 60 years before your estimated arrival, China. Try and keep up.

哎，美国在你预计到达之前的60多年就已经做到了。试着跟上吧。

LamysHusband3 -> H_O_M_E_R
Wait until you learn how many firsts the Soviets got during the space race.

等你知道苏联在太空竞赛中获得了多少个第一再说吧。

ChadPowers200 -> LamysHusband3
The US has been the leader of technology and innovation for the past century.

在过去的一个世纪里，美国一直是技术和创新的领导者。

Science_is_Greatness -> H_O_M_E_R
not everything in life is a dick-measuring contest as you believe.

生活中不是每件事都像你想象的那样是一场“谁屌大”的比赛。

Electrical_Age_7483 -> H_O_M_E_R
They lost the plans to the Saturn five so aren't sure they can do it again

他们丢失了设计土星五号的图纸，因此不确定他们能否再来一次。

oForce21o -> Electrical_Age_7483
lost the plans? we have the plans for saturn V, but the methods we used to build the rocket are lost to time. No more hand crafted rocket parts, everything nowadays is made by machine, which means it won't be entirely accurate. Which is why we made a new moon rocket design.

丢了图纸？我们是有土星五号的图纸，但是我们制造火箭的方法已经失传了。不再有手工制造的火箭零件了，现在的一切都是机器制造的，这意味着它不会完全精确。这就是为什么我们做了一种新的月球火箭设计。

buckerducktruck -> oForce21o
Hand crafting is more accurate that precision guided systems for building machine parts?

在制造机器零件方面，手工比精密导向系统更精确？

oForce21o -> buckerducktruck
youre right, its not, but cnc machining wasnt the way parts were built in the 50s-70s.

的确没有，但是数控加工不是50-70年代制造零件的方式。

monkywrnch -> oForce21o
There was a book in the 90s that claimed this. I went to space camp around that time and was told the same. The claim is incorrect though. They have the blue prints.
Besides those call for 1960s materials and tech plus we've learned a lot since then. It made more sense to build a new rocket than to try to remake the Saturn V.

90年代有一本书就是这么说的。那段时间我去了太空夏令营，他们也是这么告诉我的。不过，这种说法不对。他们有蓝图。
除了那些需要60年代的材料和技术外，我们从那以后学到了很多东西。建造一枚新的火箭比试图重建土星五号更有意义。

ActualAd2991
Excellent, I imagine with today's technology it will be far easier to do than in the 60s when NASA was considering their options to land on the Moon.

太棒了，我想以现在的技术，要比60年代NASA考虑登月方案的时候容易得多。

veerKg_CSS_Geologist -> ActualAd2991
It is easier today. However it depends what the mission was. In the 60s it was just to get to the moon first. Now the plans are to create a sustainable presence on the moon. That’s much more complicated.

现在是容易得多。不过这取决于任务是什么。在60年代，只是为了先登上月球。而现在的计划是在月球上建立一个可持续的存在。那就复杂多了。

The_Dildozer_9000 -> veerKg_CSS_Geologist
Now the plans are to create a sustainable presence on the moon.
No entity on earth, including China and NASA, currently has any realistic plans to do this.

“现在的计划是在月球上建立一个可持续的存在”
目前，包括中国和NASA在内，地球上没有任何实体有这样做的现实计划。

sebaska -> The_Dildozer_9000
Actually NASA has. A bit nebulous, but they have plans for extended stays on the Moon, heavy cargo delivery and so on. With Starship those plans are definitely realistic.

实际上NASA有这计划。虽然有点模糊，但是他们计划延长在月球上的停留时间，运送重型货物等。有了星舰，这些计划肯定会成为现实的。

isaiddgooddaysir -> sebaska
You need those engines to be able to throttle up and down to land successfully on the moon. China is throwing a lot of money into launchers, stations etc. At some point, if the US continues to throw money down 1980's tech (Im talking to you SLS) China is going to pass the US up.

你需要这些引擎能够加速减速，才能成功登陆月球。中国在发射台、空间站等方面投入了大量资金。在某个时候，如果美国继续向80年代的技术投资(我在说你，SLS) ，中国将超过美国。

paul_wi11iams -> sebaska
China has done things pretty effectively regarding the success rate of robotic landings on both the Moon and Mars.
For speed of execution, its true that they dawdled for several years after their first astronaut to LEO, but have been catching up recently both for automated and crewed flight. Like the US, China is showing signs of a move to public-private partnership and they need to be taken seriously, including for the prospective 2030 target.

在机器人登陆月球和火星的成功率方面，中国做得相当有效。
就执行速度而言，在第一位航天员到达低地轨道后，他们确实拖了几年时间，但最近在自动化飞行和载人飞行方面都在迎头赶上。与美国一样，中国也显示出转向公私合作的迹象，需要认真对待这些迹象，包括2030年的预期目标。

OSUfan88 -> paul_wi11iams
If you were to exclude SpaceX, I feel that China is developing their space capabilities at a faster rate than any other country. Not only that, but they're accelerating.
SpaceX can only do so much, and I think there's a chance where China surpasses everyone at some point. They seem to be moving forward with confidence and vision.
I think this is mostly a good thing, as humanity making it to the "stars" is good, regardless of flag color. It'll also push the United States to take it more seriously, as we don't like to be #2.

如果不包括SpaceX，我觉得中国发展太空能力的速度比其他任何国家都要快。不仅如此，他们还在加速。
SpaceX 只能做到这么多，我认为中国有可能在某个时候超越所有国家。他们似乎满怀信心和远见地向前迈进。
我认为这基本上是一件好事，因为无论国旗的颜色如何，人类能够登上“星星”就是好事。这也会促使美国更认真对待它，因为我们不喜欢成为第二名。

chiron_cat -> OSUfan88
I hope they do. I want to see video of them kicking a US flag over on the moon.
It'll take something like that to get congress to pull its head out of its arse and really take space seriously.

我希望他们登上月球，我想看他们在月球上踢翻美国国旗的视频。
只有像这样的事情，才能让国会把脑袋从屁股里拔出来，并且重视太空。

Golinth -> chiron_cat
Even then, congress has a 70% chance to grovel at China’s feet afterwards. Can’t upset our biggest trade partner or whatever

即便如此，国会还是有70%的机会在事后向中国卑躬屈膝。不能让我们最大的贸易伙伴不高兴

veerKg_CSS_Geologist -> Golinth
Congress has been pissing China for the past 2-3 years.

在过去的2-3年里，国会一直在惹恼中国。

Caleth -> chiron_cat
Good. Perhaps with a serious competitor the rest of the world will kick itself in to high gear.
If SpaceX seems like the only serious chance to beat China to the Moon we might well see them getting large cash infusions to buy StarShip launches.

很好。也许有了一个强有力的竞争对手，世界其他国家就会全力以赴。
如果 SpaceX 看起来是击败中国登月的唯一机会，我们很可能会看到他们获得大量现金注入来购买星舰的发射。

Sattalyte -> Caleth
Brah, why do you think we have the Artemis program? It's a direct response to the Chinese lunar program.
For the US and China to both have competing lunar programs now, and if China beat the US, would be completely humiliating to the US on the world stage. The whole Eastern world would hail China as the new kings of space. That's not something the US would ever allow to happen without a serious fight. So this is very much a new space race, and one the US intends to win.

兄弟，你以为我们为什么会有阿尔忒弥斯计划？ 这是对中国登月计划的直接回应。
美国和中国现在都有相互竞争的登月计划，如果中国击败美国的话，那将是美国在世界舞台上的彻底耻辱。整个东方世界都会欢呼中国成为新的太空之王。美国绝不会允许这种事情在没有认真对抗的情况下发生。因此，这在很大程度上是一场全新的太空竞赛，而美国有意赢得这场竞赛。

kyoto_magic
“U.S. astronauts are expected to return to the moon by 2025”.
Doubt. I think we’ll be lucky if we beat China back at this point. I’d just assume more delays are gonna pop up

“美国宇航员有望在2025年重返月球”。
表示怀疑。如果我们在登月上击败中国，我认为就很幸运了。我猜还会有更多的延误。

bombloader80 -> kyoto_magic
It really matters who can establish a presence now. Flags and footprints have been done, who can establish the first moon base?

现在谁能在月球上建立基地真的很重要。国旗和脚印已经留下了，谁能建立第一个月球基地？

ackermann -> kyoto_magic
Plenty of delays will pop up for China too. Goes both ways.
What space project, especially crewed space project, ever met a target date set 7 years in advance?

中国也会频繁延误，这是双向的。
有什么太空项目，特别是载人太空项目，能提前7年完成预定的目标日期？

Golinth -> kyoto_magic
I was about to say. At this rate 2035 seems more reasonable

我正要说，照这个速度2035年似乎更合理

Don_Floo
Hopefully they will come close. My defense sector shares would dearly enjoy more competition from china.

希望他们接近这一目标。我的国防板块股票会非常乐于接受来自中国的更多竞争。

Emble12
Seems like a streamlined version of the Artemis architecture for the most part, just smaller. Still very exciting, and I’m a big fan of sending the lander to the moon in one launch.

大体看上去像是阿耳忒弥斯架构的简化版，只是体积更小。还是很让人兴奋的，而且我是“一次发射就把着陆器送上月球”的铁杆粉丝。

rustybeancake
U.S. astronauts are expected to return to the moon by 2025.
Expected by whom? I predict the US return will end up being much more of a nail biter with China’s first landing.

“美国宇航员有望在2025年重返月球”
谁的“有望”？我预计，随着中国的首次登陆，美国的“回归”最后会变得更加棘手。

ackermann -> rustybeancake
I predict the US return will end up being much more of a nail biter with China’s first landing
Like most aerospace projects, I assume both will miss their target dates by 5 years, or more. I don’t think China is immune to delays either.
So I’d guess a US landing around 2030 at best, and China 2035 at best

“我预计，随着中国的首次登陆，美国的“回归”最后会变得更加棘手”
像大多数航天项目一样，我觉得这两者都将把目标日期推迟5年或更长的时间。我不认为中国能免于延误。
所以，我猜美国最早会在2030年左右着陆，中国最早在2035年着陆。

QVRedit -> rustybeancake
That (2025) may have been the original aspirational schedule, but it seems very unlikely to be that soon..
Most likely it’s going to end up being a race with China.

这(2025年)可能是最初抱负的时间表，但似乎不太可能这么快...
最有可能的结果是与中国比赛。

s1eep
Who do you think they're going to blame the mechanical failure on?

你认为他们会把机械故障归咎于谁？

Gonnabehave -> s1eep
Yo mamma was flying the rocket and she was too heavy for lift off

你妈当时正在驾驶火箭，然而她太重了，飞不起来

LadyAquanine7351
I could totally see the CIA sabotaging them before they ever get off the ground.

我完全可以预见，中情局在他们发射前会搞破坏。

fisheramacs
Glad to hear that! It's really good news for all humanity.

很高兴听到这个消息！这对全人类来说都是好消息。